The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by SL93talk 00:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
... that the small fish species Poecilia vandepolli existed, then it did not, and now it does again?
Source: "Poecilia vandepolli Van Lidth de Jeude, 1887 is re-examined and resurrected from synonymy as the Antillian representative of P. sphenops Valenciennes, 1846." [1]
ALT1: ... that the small fish species Poecilia vandepolli was resurrected in 1992? Source: "Poecilia vandepolli Van Lidth de Jeude, 1887 is re-examined and resurrected from synonymy as the Antillian representative of P. sphenops Valenciennes, 1846." [2]
ALT2: ... that Antillean mollies solve food shortage problems by eating their own offspring? Source: "In a confined area, only lack of food seems to keep down the population at a certain density. The offspring will for the greater part either starve to death or be consumed by the cannibalistic adults, the latter phenomenon being more important than the former as we know from looking at the stomach contents." [3]
Overall: I prefer ALT2, as that is the one hook that I find interesting. But one question - is it better there to refer to it as Van de Poll's molly? See the first sentence in the article, which differs w the spelling in the hook. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:1979:BEF5:5AEC:99F4 (talk) 20:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
I prefer ALT2, as that is the one hook that I find interesting. But one question - is it better there to refer to it as Van de Poll's molly? See the first sentence in the article, which differs w the spelling in the hook. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:1979:BEF5:5AEC:99F4 (talk) 20:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)